4.1 Review

The Neurobiological Basis of Human Aggression: A Review on Genetic and Epigenetic Mechanisms

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.b.32388

关键词

genetic association studies; animal models; aggression; epigenetics

资金

  1. European Commission [602407 - FemNAT-CD]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aggression is an evolutionary conserved behavior present in most species including humans. Inadequate aggression can lead to long-term detrimental personal and societal effects. Here, we differentiate between proactive and reactive forms of aggression and review the genetic determinants of it. Heritability estimates of aggression in general vary between studies due to differing assessment instruments for aggressive behavior (AB) as well as age and gender of study participants. In addition, especially non-shared environmental factors shape AB. Current hypotheses suggest that environmental effects such as early life stress or chronic psychosocial risk factors (e.g., maltreatment) and variation in genes related to neuroendocrine, dopaminergic as well as serotonergic systems increase the risk to develop AB. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge of the genetics of human aggression based on twin studies, genetic association studies, animal models, and epigenetic analyses with the aim to differentiate between mechanisms associated with proactive or reactive aggression. We hypothesize that from a genetic perspective, the aminergic systems are likely to regulate both reactive and proactive aggression, whereas the endocrine pathways seem to be more involved in regulation of reactive aggression through modulation of impulsivity. Epigenetic studies on aggression have associated non-genetic risk factors with modifications of the stress response and the immune system. Finally, we point to the urgent need for further genome-wide analyses and the integration of genetic and epigenetic information to understand individual differences in reactive and proactive AB. (C) 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据